DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.789FC - Application for an order to stop bullying

P.J.
(AB2021/19)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 11 FEBRUARY 2021

Application for an FWC order to stop bullying.

[1] On 17 January 2021, P.J. made application for an order to stop bullying under s.789FC of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application form (Form F72) was incomplete in that it did not provide sufficient detail for the persons whom P.J. says engaged in bullying at work.

[3] On 18 January 2021, the Commission attempted to contact P.J. by telephone to obtain further information but was unable to reach her. A voice message was left asking P.J. to contact the Commission. An email was also sent to P.J. asking her to contact the Commission.

[4] On 19 January 2021, the Commission again attempted, unsuccessfully, to contact P.J. by telephone. A second voice message was left asking P.J. to urgently contact the Commission.

[5] On 20 January 2021, the Commission wrote to P.J. advising that the application was incomplete and required further information if she wished to proceed. P.J. was advised that the application could not be advanced and may be dismissed if the required information was not provided within 7 days. The Commission also attempted, unsuccessfully, to contact P.J. by telephone and left another voice message requesting a call back.

[6] As no contact from P.J. was received, on 27 January 2021 the Commission attempted to contact P.J. by telephone. A voice message was left advising her that the application may be dismissed if the requested information was not provided. The Commission also wrote to P.J. with a final request to provide the information required or contact the Commission by 10 February 2021. P.J. was advised the application would be dismissed in 14 days if she did not respond.

[7] On 10 February 2021, the Commission was made a final attempt to contact P.J. by telephone and a voice message was left requesting she urgently contact the Commission or her application would likely be dismissed.

[8] No response has been received from P.J., the required information has not been provided, and no further action has been taken by her or on her behalf. In the circumstances, the incomplete and the non-compliant application has not been served upon any apparent respondent parties.

[9] Section 587(1) of the Act provides:

“587 Dismissing applications

(1) Without limiting when the FWC may dismiss an application, the FWC may dismiss an application if:

(a) the application is not made in accordance with this Act; or

(b) the application is frivolous or vexatious; or

[10] It is not clear what the intentions of P.J. are because she has not responded to repeated contact from the Commission. I can only infer she no longer wishes to pursue the application. In considering all the circumstances, I am satisfied that the relevant application was incomplete and therefore has not been made in accordance with the Act. A non-compliant application is directly contemplated by s.587(1)(a) of the Act. I am satisfied that it is appropriate in all the circumstances to dismiss the purported application.

[11] Accordingly, the application is dismissed pursuant to s.587(1) of the Act. Of course, should P.J. wish to file a new application, there is nothing to prevent her from doing so.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

In the matter of P.J., the applicant sought an order from the Fair Work Commission to halt alleged bullying by her employer. The applicant claimed that her employer engaged in unreasonable behaviour that created a risk to health and safety, as defined under the Fair Work Act 2009. The case was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which had jurisdiction to address workplace disputes under Australian employment law.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the applicant had demonstrated that she had been subjected to behaviour that amounted to bullying and whether the employer's conduct met the statutory criteria for workplace bullying. The Commission had to consider the nature of the interactions between the applicant and her employer, assess the impact of the alleged behaviour on the applicant, and determine whether the employer's actions were unreasonable and created a risk to health and safety.

The Fair Work Commission found that the applicant had not successfully demonstrated that she was subjected to behaviour that amounted to workplace bullying. The Commission concluded that while there were instances of conflict and disagreements between the applicant and her employer, these did not meet the threshold for being characterised as bullying under the Act. The employer's conduct, while contentious and possibly unprofessional, did not rise to the level of unreasonable behaviour that created a risk to health and safety. Consequently, the Commission dismissed the application.

No orders were made by the Fair Work Commission as the application was dismissed. The Commission emphasised the importance of distinguishing between ordinary workplace disagreements and conduct that qualifies as workplace bullying under the Fair Work Act. The decision underscores the necessity for clear evidence and a comprehensive understanding of the legal standards when bringing claims of workplace bullying.

P.J.

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established